I have two hassles to do with who I am. The first is that people always talk about England as if it means all of Britain. They just forget about the other bits as if they don't matter.

The second hassle is the way people use 'Jewish' as an insult, without even realising what they're saying. Say someone won't lend someone else a pen, or give them any crisps, they get called 'Jewish'. Then there's all those jokes about Jews being mean and tight. Nobody my age even knows where it comes from, and they usually don't even realise they know someone Jewish, but they all think it's funny to go on about Jews hanging on to their money. I think it sucks.

Do you notice when you find out someone who has been in the vercinity of a jew black,white or brown all act the same like they have been deceived.

People go on about Scots people being mean as well, so it's just as well I don't have a Scottish accent. I don't know why, but that doesn't bug me as much, maybe because the Scots haven't been so badly treated as the Jews have.....

Oh of course...

I am starting to identify Jews by their arguments. Today, on 'Larry King' on CNN, he was interviewing an Italian woman, who said to him 'This conversation is so Jewish!'! That had been what I was thinking!

Their arguments are basically pro-inclusion, and pro-capitalist. They end up with the whole world, and they end up exploiting it all!

The thing is, they pretend when they argue that they are individuals, but they are not: they are a group, with an agenda! People with agendas in business have to state them, don't they? I don't know, but I think so! Because otherwise, they could act as a group to bankrupt companies, and then to buy up their shares cheaply, and to make unfair profits that way. They should have to state them in other spheres of life, too! Why 'aren't' people's lives this valuable?!

The thing about a group is that it works towards an end. It has party politics! Whereas the thing about individuals is that they seek to frame present circumstances for themselves, rather than entire futures for others! Thus, a group is inherently biased in all of its arguments not to be fair to all individuals, or even to any, and not to frame the moment, but to frame the future! This is prejudicial to the interests of those who are outside of the group, and it is therefore dishonest of those who are in the group not to state, when making their arguments, that they are in the group which they are in, so that their true motives are known, and people do not believe that they are not trying to falsely sway them.

If this were required, as a matter of social ettiquette at least, then groups, including when speaking as individuals, which did not disclose themselves, could be openly identified. People could then publicly identify Jews without fear as espousing Jewish ends, at least if they knew what such ends were!

Individuality by its very nature does not unduly sway policy, whereas groups do. Thus, undisclosed group behaviour is undemocratically powerful. This is why Jews 'defend' individualism, no doubt, and encourage it in others!

The Right is recognised and identified, insultingly, by the Left. And the Right in turn now identify the Left! However, no-one is yet identifying the Jew, publicly, are they?! Perhaps we should start to!

People are already beginning to recognise Jewish political behaviour. We should now start to require as socialised behaviour the disclosing of group memberships during arguments, or at least to insist on the right of the Right to exercise, as the Left does, the right to identify group behaviour where we think such identification is appropriate! In this way we could freely identify Jewish political behaviour during arguments, and thereby to identify Jews. In this way, people could clearly see for themselves the harm which this group of people wishes to inflict upon them!